Forum search & shortcuts

Disabling RAM in W7
 

[Closed] Disabling RAM in W7

Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Cougar, I think you are just choosing the compression ratio it uses when writing. So at 50% compression the ram will always fit into a file at 50% the size.....?

50% is the minimum anyway.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 78537
Full Member
 

Well,

One of us is wrong. Quite happy to hold my hand up and say it's me, not something I'm 100% sure about.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 5:27 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

I'm not 100% sure either, but I can't imagine they'd let you mandate the file size if they weren't sure it would work.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 6:02 pm
Posts: 78537
Full Member
 

I can imagine that fairly readily. (-:


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 6:16 pm
Posts: 377
Free Member
 

You don't use the full 32gb of ram in normal use... If ever. The most you would be using before you hibernate is 1gb or 2... Not 32.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 6:21 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Well, the hibernate file is 32Gb but that may not all be being written to of course. But fact is, it takes 6 mins to resume.

The most you would be using before you hibernate is 1gb or 2

12Gb is normal. Why do you think I have lots of RAM?


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 6:55 pm
Posts: 43955
Full Member
 

[quote=molgrips ]Because re-starting all my apps takes ages and is a user-intensive task.
Put them in the Startup Folder


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 6:57 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

It'll still take just as long. It's the 5 minutes of hard disk thrashing after you log in that slows it all down. I'd still have to log into things and the like.

Trust me, I'm not a total numpty. I do know there are alternatives, but I would just quite like it if features that should be available actually worked.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 7:15 pm
Posts: 43955
Full Member
 

[quote=molgrips ]
Trust me, I'm not a total numpty.
60 squillion threads on STW suggest otherwise...... 🙂


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 7:26 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Weirdo.

You're the one failing to solve a problem then blaming me for having it.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 7:42 pm
 br
Posts: 18125
Free Member
 

[i]60 squillion threads on STW suggest otherwise...... [/i]

😆


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 8:07 pm
Posts: 1646
Full Member
 

Gave the RAM disk as go, using it for the cache in Chrome and for temp files, have to say I'm impressed with the difference in browsing speed.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 8:52 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

EDITED

Already done ramdisks, didn't make a lot of difference. More concerned about the hibernate issue tbh.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 8:54 pm
Posts: 78537
Full Member
 

RAM disks [i]shouldn't[/i] work on a modern system, from a raw performance point of view. I'm going out in a minute and that's a long explanation that I've not got time to type, but I'd be curious to hear whether that 'impressive difference' is real or perceived. Ie, have you timed it?


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 8:58 pm
Posts: 1646
Full Member
 

Good point I'll have to work out a test just to see by how much. Off to Google some ideas on how to test.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 9:02 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
Topic starter
 

The RAM disk thing - it depends what you use them for. The best suggestion is to use them for browser caches. They can be made persistent.

They ONLY work though if you have plenty of physical RAM left over. If the ramdisk is at risk of being swapped into the page file then you're wasting your time.

Incidentally, on the subject of browser caches - I'm considering putting the cache on an SD card on my Vaio P - it's very under powered and under batteried, and the disk is slow and spends a lot of time going, even when browsing. Some or most of this is cache activity.


 
Posted : 26/02/2013 9:45 pm
Page 2 / 2